Are on-field referees on the brink of becoming obsolete?

In a country that is fuelled by fairness and legitimacy, why is it that we constantly undermine the integrity of our match officials?

I hear a lot of arguing between fans of various sporting codes, particularly about which is best at being fair to both teams.

When we look at rugby league, it’s the blatantly missed penalties and unfair referees. In cricket, it’s the poor calls and tiresome accounts of what should have been the right decision.

In rugby union, it’s the same as league – was it a try, or not? And we’re seeing the ‘grey area’ creep into more and more sports.

Now I’m not saying that this isn’t fair, since ultimately the referee has the option to ask for video verification. But is there room for more change, or should a drastic reconstruction of the video referee system be put in place for the future of all sport?

Rugby Union
Have we gotten to the point where match officials are too scared to make a call on their own? That they are deciding to take every decision to the video referee to prevent embarrassment and harassment if they get it wrong?

I find the constant stop-start of the game is making sport less enjoyable. It is becoming more and more apparent that referees are just there for show and it’s the video referee that really decides the outcome of a match; ‘play-by-play’ at six frames per second.

It’s not that I don’t understand the idea of the video referee – in order to make it fair for both teams, they each have a chance to get tries from video referee referrals.

In this instance, however, I find it comical that referees will refuse to make a decision and leave it to the video referee instead.

Now I’m sure that some will say that video referees are important, but here is the conundrum. Is it acceptable for a match referee to go to the video referee for every try scoring attempt in the game?

Rugby League
The NRL suffers the same fate as union does in this case – nearly every decision goes to the video referee as if the match officials are a bunch of kids, looking for approval from their daddy.

Now, the NRL has taken it a step further in bringing the crowd into the video referee’s box – specifically, by making video referees explain their decisions to viewers.

Is it really that important? It will help the fans understand the decision, but is the introduction of video referee explanations questionable, or is there a call for every code to pick this up?

Cricket
Cricket is one of the few sports that have the interesting concept in which each team gets to challenge three decisions.

Where there are many cameras placed around the ground, as well as ‘Hawkeye’, infrared and the Snickometer, a ‘video referee’ is able to decide if the decision was given correctly or not using modern technology. If the decision is wrong, the team keeps their challenge – if the decision is right, the team loses one.

Is this a viable use of video referee technology though? Surely we don’t want to make the game go longer by challenging every wicket.

Tennis
Tennis is very much the same as cricket in terms of the technology available to the game. They also have ‘Hawkeye’, infrared and a million and one cameras filming from every angle imaginable.

Tennis is an interesting game that the video referee has been brought into, where one point can decide a match or completely turn a game.

But again, are we so fixated on the technology that it takes away from the true essence of the game? And if so is there really a reason to have match officials?

AFL
Australia’s own game has an interesting concept when it comes to video referee – specifically, it has no need for it.

This sport has developed so that in the recent years when a video referee was introduced, it was only used as an advertising tool to get money for a specific company which shan’t be named.

But is it necessary? I think not. In a game which is free-flowing, continuous and structured, the video referee just adds confusion and annoyance.

Football
Football here has yet to introduce video referees, however it has been in the works for high stakes games like the World Cup.

I am failing to understand how it would work. For example, when a referee in any other sport calls for the video referee, the ball is out and play is stopped.

Since football is mostly a free-flowing game, any times when the video referee could be used will see the ball still in play. Short of stopping play every time the referee needs assistance, I am stumped for ideas.

Ultimately, each sport will use its video referee as it deems fit.

Could union and league use this system of three challenges a half to prevent the inevitable video referee montage that occurs in these sports?

Furthermore, with superior technology and new wave devices is it imperative to send every decision to the video referee?

And when we eventually film the match from 100 different angles and get up to the millisecond coverage, broadcast and replays, will we even need on-field match officials in the future?